Chris Kaiser's Posts - Home Energy Pros2015-03-03T18:52:43ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiserhttp://api.ning.com:80/files/qjjDJ9oGOcmLGP8vopyjMxU9ocLlF1xMfy594Nt-LKPo6bRBovX6dX94udujlS1AIT2pqZsO3uLelAAfqg46vyjLLBaE4UfH/DSC03297.JPG?width=48&height=48&crop=1%3A1http://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profiles/blog/feed?user=2ygt5bnxyrql6&xn_auth=noAre LED bulbs ready for homes?tag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2013-03-24:6069565:BlogPost:1116062013-03-24T21:00:00.000ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiser
<p>If you haven't been paying attention, LED's for the home are dropping in price like crazy. </p>
<p>I first put up a post on the <a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/2013/02/17/what-best-screw-a19-led-bulb" target="_blank">best LED A19 bulb</a> for 60-W and 40-W replacements with pricing pulled from Amazon.</p>
<p>But then <a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/2013/03/17/cree-revolutionizes-residential-led-lighting-2" target="_blank">Cree came out with their bulb and totally blew the field…</a></p>
<p>If you haven't been paying attention, LED's for the home are dropping in price like crazy. </p>
<p>I first put up a post on the <a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/2013/02/17/what-best-screw-a19-led-bulb" target="_blank">best LED A19 bulb</a> for 60-W and 40-W replacements with pricing pulled from Amazon.</p>
<p>But then <a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/2013/03/17/cree-revolutionizes-residential-led-lighting-2" target="_blank">Cree came out with their bulb and totally blew the field away.</a></p>
<p>You can see a comparison I put together at the bottom of this post. When you factor in price, efficiency, and warranty, no other manufacturer comes close to what Cree is currently offering.</p>
<p>Are LEDs cheaper than CFLs? Nope, not even close, but they're getting closer.</p>
<p>Plus, they don't contain mercury (<a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/2009/02/23/mercury-and-cfl-recycling" target="_blank">no need for special recycling</a>), their lifespan isn't shortened by frequent on/off (like my <a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/2010/12/17/occupancy-sensor-and-cfl-light-bulbs" target="_blank">CFLs in my kitchen are with my occupancy sensor</a>), and they will last much longer than CFLs.</p>
<p>I have 4 LED bulbs in my home, and I still use mainly CFLs, but my thinking has changed recently and I'm taking a much closer look at LED bulbs. How about you?</p>
<p></p>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="576">
<tbody><tr><td style="height: 20px; width: 136px;" height="15">Name</td>
<td style="height: 20px; width: 136px;" height="15"> </td>
<td style="width: 136px;">Color temp</td>
<td style="width: 136px;">Warranty (Yrs)</td>
<td style="width: 87px;">Lumens</td>
<td style="width: 87px;">Watts</td>
<td style="width: 99px;">Lumens/Watt</td>
<td style="width: 87px;"> Price </td>
<td style="width: 137px;">Lumens/Watt/Price</td>
</tr>
<tr><td style="height: 20px;" height="15"> </td>
<td style="height: 20px;" height="15"> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr><td style="height: 20px;" height="15"><a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/products/lighting-led/feit-electric-led-a19-800-lumen-135-w">Philips AmbientLED</a></td>
<td style="height: 20px; text-align: center;" height="15"><img alt="" class="media-image" style="width: 100px; height: 100px;" src="http://www.mapawatt.com/sites/default/files/styles/square_thumbnail/public/phlips_ambient_led.jpg?itok=iVIYqC9r" height="180" width="180"/></td>
<td>2690</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>805</td>
<td>12.5</td>
<td>64.4</td>
<td> $16.65</td>
<td>3.9</td>
</tr>
<tr><td style="height: 20px;" height="15"><a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/products/lighting-led/cree-led-type-800-l-95-w">Cree 9.5W</a></td>
<td style="height: 20px; text-align: center;" height="15"><img alt="" class="media-image" style="width: 100px; height: 100px;" src="http://www.mapawatt.com/sites/default/files/styles/square_thumbnail/public/cree_daylight_LED_bulb_0.jpg?itok=sAymUO0y" height="180" width="180"/></td>
<td>2700</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>800</td>
<td>9.5</td>
<td>84.2</td>
<td> $12.97</td>
<td>6.5</td>
</tr>
<tr><td style="height: 20px;" height="15"> </td>
<td style="height: 20px;" height="15"> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr><td style="height: 20px;" height="15"><a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/products/lighting-led/feit-electric-led-a19-800-lumen-135-w">Feit Electric</a></td>
<td style="height: 20px; text-align: center;" height="15"><img alt="" class="media-image" style="width: 100px; height: 100px;" src="http://www.mapawatt.com/sites/default/files/styles/square_thumbnail/public/Feit_Electric_A19_OMNI800_LED_0.jpg?itok=aTU8iUrB" height="180" width="180"/></td>
<td>5000</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>800</td>
<td>13.5</td>
<td>59.3</td>
<td> $16.00</td>
<td>3.7</td>
</tr>
<tr><td style="height: 20px;" height="15"><a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/products/lighting-led/cree-led-type-800-l-9-w">Cree 9W</a></td>
<td style="height: 20px; text-align: center;" height="15"><img alt="" class="media-image" style="width: 100px; height: 100px;" src="http://www.mapawatt.com/sites/default/files/styles/square_thumbnail/public/cree_daylight_LED_bulb_0.jpg?itok=sAymUO0y" height="180" width="180"/></td>
<td>5000</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>800</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>88.9</td>
<td> $13.97</td>
<td>6.4</td>
</tr>
<tr><td style="height: 20px;" height="15"> </td>
<td style="height: 20px;" height="15"> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr><td style="height: 20px;" height="15"><a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/products/lighting-led/maxxima-led-a19-465-lumen-7-w">Maxxima LED</a></td>
<td style="height: 20px; text-align: center;" height="15"><img alt="" class="media-image" style="width: 80px; height: 80px;" src="http://www.mapawatt.com/sites/default/files/styles/square_thumbnail/public/maxxima_screw_in_LED_456L_full.jpg?itok=wVEUNxb_" height="180" width="180"/></td>
<td>2700</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>465</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>66.4</td>
<td> $9.99</td>
<td>6.6</td>
</tr>
<tr><td style="height: 20px;" height="15"><a href="http://www.mapawatt.com/products/lighting-led/cree-led-type-450-l-6-w">Cree 6W</a></td>
<td style="height: 20px; text-align: center;" height="15"><img alt="" class="media-image" style="width: 100px; height: 100px;" src="http://www.mapawatt.com/sites/default/files/styles/square_thumbnail/public/cree_daylight_LED_bulb_0.jpg?itok=sAymUO0y" height="180" width="180"/></td>
<td>2700</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>450</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>75.0</td>
<td> $9.97</td>
<td>7.5</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>Home Energy Consumption for your region and your ratestag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2012-09-03:6069565:BlogPost:929112012-09-03T17:30:00.000ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiser
<p>Below is a post I published on calculating a <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2012/09/03/home-energy-use-for-your-region-and-your-utility-rates/" target="_blank">home energy use by region</a> using a tool my utility (Georgia Power) provided (made by Apogee). It's a nice tool to show homeowners if their utility provides something similar. It could help you validate how improvements to the home can help save energy.</p>
<p>----------------…</p>
<p></p>
<p>Below is a post I published on calculating a <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2012/09/03/home-energy-use-for-your-region-and-your-utility-rates/" target="_blank">home energy use by region</a> using a tool my utility (Georgia Power) provided (made by Apogee). It's a nice tool to show homeowners if their utility provides something similar. It could help you validate how improvements to the home can help save energy.</p>
<p>----------------</p>
<p><a href="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/home_energy_use_my_home_region.jpg"><img class=" wp-image-7410" title="home_energy_use_my_home_region" src="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/home_energy_use_my_home_region.jpg" alt="" height="391" width="515"/></a></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Usually when I receive emails from my electric utility, Georgia Power, promising to offer energy saving tips I ignore them because they are just too basic. The other day I got an email that said the following:</p>
<blockquote><p style="text-align: left;">High temperatures can impact your monthly electric bill because your air conditioning system must work harder to keep your home comfortable. To help manage this potential impact, I invite you to use our free online tool to <a href="http://msg4svc.net/ccygo/502538/68/480622/1958/0/S/0/0/ezmr.html" target="_blank">find personalized ways to save</a>. You’ll also find out where you use the most electricity in your home and why your bill changes from month to month.</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: left;">So I decided to play along.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">The problem I've had with most energy tip websites that show breakdowns of how homes use energy is that they aren't specific to each region and <a title="Mapawatt: Climate Zones and Degree Days" href="http://mapawatt.com/2010/11/19/climate-zones-and-degree-days/" target="_blank">climate zones</a>. When we covered <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2009/03/20/household-energy-use/" target="_blank">Household Energy Use</a>we showed a breakdown of how a typical single family home uses energy, but not every home is going to be typical. You can see that breakdown below:</p>
<p><a href="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/energy_use_pie_graph.png"><img class="size-medium wp-image-1516" title="energy_use_pie_graph" src="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/energy_use_pie_graph-300x210.png" alt="" height="210" width="300"/></a></p>
<p>My concern with the above chart is that I was convinced I spent more money cooling my home in the summer than I did heating it in the winter.</p>
<p>Which is where the <a href="http://c03.apogee.net/calcs/rescalc5x/Question.aspx?utilityid=gapower" target="_blank">energy checkup tool provided by Georgia Power</a> comes in. The tool is a <a href="http://www.apogee.net/products/homeEnergyCalculator.aspx" target="_blank">home energy calculator produced by Apogee</a>, who provides software solutions to utilities. I started by telling the tool which region in Georgia I lived in, and then spent about 5 minutes filling out questionnaire which asked things like the the type of home I lived in (middle town-home), how many square feet, how many people were there and away during the day, what my thermostat is set to during the summer and winter (more on this below), what type of windows, how many lights have I changed to fluorescent (percentage based), how I cool (electric air conditioner) and heat (natural gas furnace), etc. I've filled out many of these questionnaires and this one was relatively painless. It was much easier than the original questionnaire that the now <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2011/07/01/so-long-microsoft-hohm/" target="_blank">defunct Microsoft Hohm</a>tried to get me to fill out but I gave up after 20 minutes.</p>
<p>The summary of the information I entered can be seen below (it's not 100% accurate, but very close)</p>
<p><a href="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/home_energy_calculator_inputs.png"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-7417" title="home_energy_calculator_inputs" src="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/home_energy_calculator_inputs-300x229.png" alt="" height="229" width="300"/></a>You can see the pie chart from my report below:</p>
<p><a href="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/home_energy_use_pie_chart_hot_weather.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-7411" title="home_energy_use_pie_chart_hot_weather" src="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/home_energy_use_pie_chart_hot_weather-300x182.jpg" alt="" height="182" width="300"/></a></p>
<p>You can see that cooling definitely makes up the most of my energy spend. What I like most about the report that was generated is that it relies heavily on charts and graphs, which really help users visualize where their money is going.</p>
<p>My biggest complaint with the questionnaire is that it doesn't spend enough time on thermostat setting. It asks you to pick one temperature for the heating setting and one for the cooling setting, and at the bottom of the page explains :</p>
<blockquote>Please select a temperature that is the effective average temperature in your home during a 24-hour period. For example, if you keep your thermostat at 70 degrees during the day and at 64 degrees for 8 hours each night, your effective average temperature would be 68 degrees. (Note: Programmable thermostats create an effective average temperature by making temperature setting changes automatically at the times that you designate.)</blockquote>
<p><br/> But for people with programmable thermostats, most know what they set the thermostat at for different times during the day (home, away, sleep) so why not allow users to fill in the times and settings if they know them? I think that would provide a more accurate approach to understanding the largest energy consumer in the home. Then the suggestions the tool produces could be more precise (i.e. "try turning up the temperature of your downstairs in sleep mode in the summer to 80º instead of 78º").</p>
<p>At this point you're probably wondering, "So how does this tool compare to reality?". Well, let's look at my actual bill amounts for electricity and natural gas below:</p>
<p><a href="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/electric_natural_gas_bill_history.png"><img class=" wp-image-7420" title="electric_natural_gas_bill_history" src="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/electric_natural_gas_bill_history-1024x643.png" alt="" height="386" width="614"/></a></p>
<p>While I'm missing August in the real world comparison, if you compare the image above to the one at the top of the post (which was taken from the report), you can see that they are very close to each other! Once I update the graph with the August bills, I expect them to be much lower than July because August was not nearly as hot.</p>
<p>If you live in a hot climate where your air conditioning system makes up the bulk of your home's energy load, you may want to dig a little deeper and check out our post on <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2012/04/22/air-conditioner-power-consumption/" target="_blank">Air Conditioner Power Consumption</a>.</p>
<p>What other tools have you found that help you calculate where and how you use energy?</p>Lead Generation Services for Home Energy Professionals?tag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2012-09-01:6069565:BlogPost:925892012-09-01T15:36:19.000ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiser
<p>Home Energy Pros,</p>
<p><br/>Has anyone used a lead generation service that they have had success with? </p>
<p></p>
<p>What are your general thoughts about lead generation?</p>
<p></p>
<p>At Mapawatt.com, we think that linking educated consumers with home energy pros is a much needed service. Of course there is Angie's list, but that is a paid service and I dont think it's that strong in Home Energy services.</p>
<p>Home Energy Pros,</p>
<p><br/>Has anyone used a lead generation service that they have had success with? </p>
<p></p>
<p>What are your general thoughts about lead generation?</p>
<p></p>
<p>At Mapawatt.com, we think that linking educated consumers with home energy pros is a much needed service. Of course there is Angie's list, but that is a paid service and I dont think it's that strong in Home Energy services.</p>Best Ways to Save Energytag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2012-08-25:6069565:BlogPost:920662012-08-25T16:03:01.000ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiser
<p>This post on the <a href="http://mapawatt.com/ways-to-save/best-ways-to-save-energy/" target="_blank">Best Ways to Save Energy</a> was originally seen on Mapawatt. The goal is to provide homeowners a reference page that will help guide them to things they can do and incentives they can earn for saving energy.</p>
<p>----</p>
<p>What are the best ways to save energy? It’s a topic that we’ve been wondering a lot about. The best ways to save energy for someone in Alaska are probably going to…</p>
<p>This post on the <a href="http://mapawatt.com/ways-to-save/best-ways-to-save-energy/" target="_blank">Best Ways to Save Energy</a> was originally seen on Mapawatt. The goal is to provide homeowners a reference page that will help guide them to things they can do and incentives they can earn for saving energy.</p>
<p>----</p>
<p>What are the best ways to save energy? It’s a topic that we’ve been wondering a lot about. The best ways to save energy for someone in Alaska are probably going to be much different from someone living in Southern California (mainly for heating and cooling reasons). But some tips (like changing incandescent bulbs to CFL or LED) work no matter where you live, because everybody uses light.</p>
<p>Before you start saving energy, you may need to get a better understand of just what energy is. If you’re an energy noob, start with:</p>
<p><strong>Energy Saving 101</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://mapawatt.com/2011/01/19/home-buying-or-refinancing-get-an-energy-efficient-mortgage/" target="_blank">What is a kWh?</a> (the most common form of expressing electrical energy)</li>
<li><a href="http://mapawatt.com/2010/02/17/what-is-therm/" target="_blank">What is a therm</a> (mainly for natural gas users)</li>
<li><a href="http://mapawatt.com/2009/03/20/household-energy-use/" target="_blank">Home Energy Consumption – Where are you using energy?</a></li>
</ul>
<div>Once you gain an understanding of what energy is, you are better equipped to understand your utility bill and how to get the numbers on that bill to go down!</div>
<p><strong>Cheap, Quick, and Easy Energy Saving Tips</strong><br/> We have put together a <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2011/02/20/free-energy-conservation-guide-worth-95/" target="_blank">free energy saving guide</a> that you can download if you register for the Mapawatt Newsletter (or <a title="Amazon.com: Mapawatt - Cheap, Free and Easy Energy Saving Guide" href="http://www.amazon.com/Cheap-Quick-Energy-Saving-ebook/dp/B004QOA7ZO/ref=sr_1_7?s=digital-text&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1345425877&amp;sr=1-7&amp;keywords=energy+saving+guide" target="_blank">purchase for $2.99 from Amazon</a>). The title of the guide is 5 Cheap, Quick and Easy Energy Saving Tips. As the title implies, it covers low or no cost strategies users can employ that won’t take too much time or effort. A summary of that guide can be seen below:</p>
<ul>
<li>Monitor and Track Energy Consumption</li>
<li>Insulate, Seal, and Block</li>
<li>Install and Use a Programmable Thermostat</li>
<li>Turn Off, Turn Down, Turn Up and Unplug</li>
<li>Install CFLs and/or LEDs</li>
</ul>
<p>Most of these tips are covered in our post on the <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2010/03/14/top-ten-home-conservation-tips-under-100/" target="_blank">Top Ten Home Energy Conservation tips under $100</a>. View the post for descriptions, but a list of the tips can be seen below:</p>
<ol>
<li>Put in CFLs ($1.25/bulb)</li>
<li>Get a programmable thermostat ($30-$100)</li>
<li>Install a ceiling fan ($50-$100)</li>
<li>Get a whole home electricity monitor ($80)</li>
<li>Get an appliance level electricity monitor ($20)</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002MCZX8S?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=mapablog-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=B002MCZX8S">Install the Perfect Flush by Brondell</a></strong> ($68)</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000FIE4J0?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=mapablog-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=B000FIE4J0">Get a bicycle pump for your car tires</a></strong> ($27)</li>
<li><strong>Use an <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00035HX6Q?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=mapablog-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=B00035HX6Q">automatic light sensor</a></strong> – ($15 )</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000XSBVMU?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=mapablog-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=B000XSBVMU">Rechargeable Battery Charger and Batteries</a></strong> – ($12.50)</li>
<li><strong>Find air leaks with a <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001LMTW2S?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=mapablog-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=B001LMTW2S">thermal leak detector</a></strong> ($23.50)</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Energy Saving Projects</strong></p>
<p>If you’ve already conquered the cheap, quick and easy strategies, you may need to move to the next level. We covered a <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2010/08/01/home-energy-saving-guide/" target="_blank">free energy saving guide that Southface Institute</a> put together, that is a great guide for DIY projects. Other things you can do:</p>
<ul>
<li>Home Energy Audit</li>
<li>Upgrading Insulation</li>
<li>More efficient heating and cooling system</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Clean Energy</strong></p>
<p>If you’ve done all you can for Energy Conservation (not using energy) and Energy Efficiency (using less energy to do the same amount of work), you may be ready for the third step, Clean Energy. Clean energy systems, like Solar PV panels or Wind Turbines, will help you produce your own clean energy, which will lower the amount of energy you need to buy from your utility. The different types of residential clean energy producing systems are (and the type of energy they produce):</p>
<ul>
<li>Solar PV (electricity)</li>
<li>Solar Thermal (heat)</li>
<li>Wind Turbine (electricity)</li>
<li>Biomass (electricity and heat)</li>
<li>Micro-hydro water turbine (electricity)</li>
<li>Natural Gas Fuel Cell (electricity and heat)</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Incentives</strong></p>
<p>If you have done all the energy saving activities you can do that don’t cost you money, you might have to consider spending some money to save some more energy. If you are going to do that, you want to make sure to take advantage of all the incentives that are available. In our post on <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2012/05/21/find-energy-incentives/" target="_blank">finding energy incentives</a> we mentioned the following types of incentives</p>
<ul>
<li>Tax Deduction</li>
<li>Tax Credit</li>
<li>Rebate</li>
<li>Free audit</li>
<li>Grant</li>
<li>Loan</li>
<li>Discounts</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Financing</strong></p>
<p>If you are planning major energy improvements, you may need to finance your energy saving investment.</p>
<p>One option is the</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://mapawatt.com/2011/01/19/home-buying-or-refinancing-get-an-energy-efficient-mortgage/" target="_blank">Energy Efficient Mortgage</a></li>
</ul>
<div>where you can take out money for energy improvements when buying or refinancing a new home.</div>
<p>On our page on <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2011/06/22/residential-solar-financing-options/" target="_blank">solar financing</a> we covered a list that One Block off the Grid put together. Their categories include (with their corresponding hyperlinks):</p>
<ul>
<li><a title="PPA" href="http://solarfinancing.1bog.org/solar-power-ppas-power-purchase-agreements/" target="_self">Solar Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs)</a></li>
<li><a title="Solar Lease" href="http://solarfinancing.1bog.org/solar-lease/" target="_self">Solar Lease</a> – also see the great post that <a title="CleanTechnica.com: Solar Lease" href="http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/08/solar-leasing-programs-growing/" target="_blank">CleanTechnica just put up on leasing solar</a>.</li>
<li><a title="Home Equity Loans" href="http://solarfinancing.1bog.org/solar-home-equity-financing/" target="_self">Home Equity Loans</a> – also see <a title="Mapawatt Blog: Energy Efficient Mortgage" href="http://mapawatt.com/2011/01/19/home-buying-or-refinancing-get-an-energy-efficient-mortgage/" target="_blank">Energy Efficient Mortgage</a></li>
<li><a title="SRECs" href="http://solarfinancing.1bog.org/srecs/" target="_self">SRECs: Solar Renewable Energy Credits</a></li>
<li><a title="PACE Municipal Financing" href="http://solarfinancing.1bog.org/municipal-solar-financing/" target="_self">PACE Muncipal Financing (Property Assessed Clean Energy)</a></li>
<li><a title="Peer to peer lending" href="http://solarfinancing.1bog.org/peer-to-peer-lending/" target="_self">Peer to Peer Lending (P2P)</a></li>
<li><a title="Feed-in-tarrifs" href="http://solarfinancing.1bog.org/feed-in-tariffs/" target="_self">Feed-In Tariffs (FIT)</a></li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Other Links:</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.energysavers.gov/tips/">http://www.energysavers.gov/tips/</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.motherearthnews.com/Renewable-Energy/Save-Money-On-Energy.aspx">http://www.motherearthnews.com/Renewable-Energy/Save-Money-On-Energy.aspx</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.powerhousetv.com/Energy-EfficientLiving/Energy-savingsTips/027471">http://www.powerhousetv.com/Energy-EfficientLiving/Energy-savingsTips/027471</a></p>
<p><a href="http://open4energy.com/smart-ways-to-save-electricity" target="_blank">Smart Ways to Save Electricity</a></p>
<p><a href="http://mapawatt.com/2009/08/07/top-energy-saving-tips/" target="_blank">Top Energy Saving Tips</a></p>Philips L Prize LED bulb not worth ittag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2012-04-06:6069565:BlogPost:813952012-04-06T02:27:24.000ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiser
<p>The following blog appeared on Mapawatt for the <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2012/04/05/philips-l-prize-led-bulb-not-worth-it/" target="_blank">Philips L prize LED bulb cost</a>. What are your thoughts on the price of this bulb? Would you recommend it to your customers when there are lower cost LEDs available?</p>
<p>-----------------</p>
<p>In March 2012 I read an article on…</p>
<p>The following blog appeared on Mapawatt for the <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2012/04/05/philips-l-prize-led-bulb-not-worth-it/" target="_blank">Philips L prize LED bulb cost</a>. What are your thoughts on the price of this bulb? Would you recommend it to your customers when there are lower cost LEDs available?</p>
<p>-----------------</p>
<p>In March 2012 I read an article on <a href="http://www.triplepundit.com/2012/03/philips-defends-new-energy-efficient-light-bulb/" target="_blank">Triple Pundit regarding Philips defending the L Prize winning LED bulb</a> from an article written in the <a title="Washington Post: Philips L Prize LED" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/government-subsidized-green-light-bulb-carries-costly-price-tag/2012/03/07/gIQAFxOD0R_story.html" target="_blank">Washington Post</a>criticizing the government for handing out 10 million dollars to a company for producing a $50 light bulb.</p>
<p>I was all set to write a post demonizing the "right wing" Washington Post for misquoting the price of the $50 bulb when I read this line in the Triple Pundit article:</p>
<blockquote>Philips states that the actual retail price of its prizewinning bulb will be closer to $20, comfortably within the L Prize requirement of $22. That’s because the bulb will be sold through partnerships with utility companies, which will offer up to $30 in rebates.</blockquote>
<p><br/>But then I saw this article on the newswire: "<a href="http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-award-winning-philips-l-prize-led-light-bulb-is-now-available-at-bulbscom-142059943.html" target="_blank">The award winning Philips L Prize LED bulb is now available at Bulbs.com</a>". So I was interested to see what it was selling for. And guess how surprised I was when I noticed that both Triple Pundit <em>and</em> the Washington Post were wrong. The 10 watt LED bulb isn't selling for $50 dollars, it is currently <a href="http://www.bulbs.com/espec.aspx?ID=19315&amp;cm_sp=Homepage-_-Rotate-_-L-Prize" target="_blank">selling for <strong>$59.99</strong> at Bulbs.com</a>! For.....one..... bulb.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/bulbs.com_philips_l_price_led_bulb.png"><img class="aligncenter wp-image-7058" title="bulbs.com_philips_l_price_led_bulb" src="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/bulbs.com_philips_l_price_led_bulb.png" alt="" height="216" width="541"/></a></p>
<p>And when I look back at the Triple Pundit note regarding the sale price of the bulb, I notice the last sentence a little more clearly. The part about the utility rebates. Which you aren't getting if you buy it online. And could utilities be wasting their money in the first place if there is a better option for consumers?</p>
<p>All this is surprising to me, because you can buy an almost identical <a href="http://www.homedepot.com/buy/electrical-light-bulbs-led/philips-12-watt-60w-equivalent-a19-ambient-led-soft-white-light-bulb-dimmable-117236.html" target="_blank">LED bulb from Philips for $24.97 from Home Depot</a>! And I did just that earlier this week.</p>
<p>It seems to me that Philips is only selling the L prize bulb on the merits that it hit arbitrary targets set forth by the department of energy, when in fact a much cheaper bulb (that they also produce) makes MUCH more sense for consumers. The two bulbs are compared in the below:</p>
<p><a href="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/philips_l_prize_led_comparison.png"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-7057" title="philips_l_prize_led_comparison" src="http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/philips_l_prize_led_comparison.png" alt="" height="104" width="321"/></a></p>
<p>While the L prize LED bulb does consume 20% less watts and it does put out 17% more light, can someone PLEASE explain why it costs <strong>140% more</strong>than their own LED bulb?</p>
<p>Mapawatt is devoted to helping consumers find products, services, and strategies to help them save money and conserve energy in their homes. I'm not sure that the L prize bulb fits that criteria at this moment. In a later post, I will go into detail on when LED bulbs can make sense (especially when compared against incandescent). But at almost $60 per bulb the <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2009/10/03/best-lighting-cost-comparison-incandescent-cfl-led/" target="_blank">savings just aren't there right now</a> (compared to 60 W incandescent based on 3 hrs/day over 10 year timeframe; this is not the case for the $24.95 LED bulb which would save you $30 over 10 years vs. an incandescent over that same time frame). I'm <del>sure</del>hoping the price will come down, but until then...</p>
<p>The moral of the story: Buy LED bulbs! They use less energy, last longer, don't contain mercury, provide great light, and the right ones are great investments. Just shop around and beware of the hype machine.</p>Utility Green Buttontag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2012-03-25:6069565:BlogPost:805902012-03-25T20:00:00.000ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiser
<p>Below is the post that originally was put up on Mapawatt on the <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2012/03/25/push-your-utility-green-button/" target="_blank">Utility Green Button</a>. As the Green Button is adopted by more and more utilities, I believe Home Energy Pros should make sure to inform every customer of its existence and how it can help homeowners better manage utility bills.</p>
<p>---------------</p>
<p>The idea for the utility Green Button was first put forth by U.S. CTO Aneesh…</p>
<p>Below is the post that originally was put up on Mapawatt on the <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2012/03/25/push-your-utility-green-button/" target="_blank">Utility Green Button</a>. As the Green Button is adopted by more and more utilities, I believe Home Energy Pros should make sure to inform every customer of its existence and how it can help homeowners better manage utility bills.</p>
<p>---------------</p>
<p>The idea for the utility Green Button was first put forth by U.S. CTO Aneesh Chopra in September 2011 when he was wondering why we can't do the same for energy data that we have proposed for health care data (with the newly created <a href="bluebuttondata.org" target="_blank">blue button</a>). In the post <a title="Whitehouse.gov: Green Button challenge" href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/09/15/modeling-green-energy-challenge-after-blue-button" target="_blank">announcing the idea for Green Button Mr. Chopra</a> stated:</p>
<blockquote>Why can’t the same common-sense concept be applied to the energy industry with a “Green Button”? Consumers should have access to their energy usage information. It should be easily downloadable and in an easy-to-read format offered by their utility or retail energy service provider.<p>So today at <a href="http://www.gridweek.com/2011/">GridWeek</a>, I <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/smartgrid09-15-11.pdf">challenged</a> the smart grid ecosystem to deliver on the vision of Green Button and provide customers access to their energy usage information electronically. With this information at their fingertips, consumers would be enabled to make more informed decisions about their energy use and, when coupled with opportunities to take action, empowered to actively manage their energy use.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br/> And surprisingly government and industry has already moved very fast to adopt the green button. There are already a set of standards for collecting green button utility data as set by the <a title="NIST.gov: Green Button Initiative" href="http://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-sggrid/bin/view/SmartGrid/GreenButtonInitiative" target="_blank">National Institute of Standards and Technology</a>.</p>
<p>What's funny to me is that I didn't even hear about the Green Button until early March of 2012 when I read a comment on our post "<a href="%20http://mapawatt.com/2012/03/05/why-is-tracking-energy-consumption-so-hard/" target="_blank">Why is tracking energy consumption so hard</a>". <a href="http://sandeen.net/wordpress/" target="_blank">Eric Sandeen</a> replied to the question of the post with:</p>
<blockquote>Which is why we need the <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/11/21/empowering-customers-green-button" rel="nofollow">green button</a>.<p>Unleash enough clever people to write portable (as in from utility to utility) apps, widgets, websites, etc to slice &amp; dice this info, and a few really great ideas should rise to the top…</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br/> I'm going to just pretend that the U.S. CTO was able to travel to the future and read my post, then travel a few months backward and announce the idea like <em>he</em> came up with it all on his own.</p>
<p>There are many of those who believe that government should stay out of the free market, but I see this as an instance where government can work together with industry to create tools to help citizens better manage their energy consumption; which saves money for them and helps society as a whole by lowering pollution. It seems that the idea of the Green Button was created out of government, but will be adopted by the market to help the public. How is this anything but good and why did it take so long for such a simple idea to be adopted? Where was the free market in all of this?</p>
<p>As an example of how private companies are getting involved with the Green Button, this past week I received a press release from EcoDog, which we covered in our post on <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2011/02/15/testing-out-fido-energy-monitor-by-ecodog/" target="_blank">Testing out the EcoDog Energy Monitor</a>. The FIDO energy monitor by EcoDog is a hardware and software platform, but their involvement with the Green Button seems to mainly be software (which I'm guessing they hope will turn in to more product sales). From the press release (which I'm showing as an example of how private companies plan to leverage the Green Button):</p>
<blockquote>EcoDog CEO Ron Pitt commented, “We’re pleased that President Obama has recognized the importance of giving consumers better access to their energy information and applaud San Diego Gas &amp; Electric for being one of the first utilities in the nation to provide customers with easy access to their detailed energy usage data. With their new Green Button tool, customers can download this data in a format that can be used for energy evaluation and analysis. To support their efforts, our team of software engineers has deployed a small subset of our sophisticated energy analytics software to enable SDG&amp;E customers to get a better understanding of their energy use.”</blockquote>
<blockquote><p>SDG&amp;E customers are invited to preview EcoDog’s Green Button app for Windows at: <a href="http://bit.ly/GreenButton" target="_blank">http://bit.ly/GreenButton</a>. A web version that addresses Macintosh and other operating systems as well as support for additional utilities is in development.</p>
<p>The company's FIDO Home Energy Watchdog is an easy-to-use hardware/software system that shows homeowners exactly how and where they are consuming electricity on a real-time basis with room-by-room detail to achieve typical monthly savings of 15 to 30 percent and more. EcoDog’s FIDO system also offers advanced monitoring of solar and alternative energy generation.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br/> Here's a great list of <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/pressroom/03222012-support" target="_blank">utilities and service providers related to the Green Button</a> (data from the link shown below).</p>
<p>Utilities:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>American Electric Power</strong>, serving 5.3 million customers in 11 states (Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia);</li>
<li><strong>Austin Energy</strong>, serving 400,000 customers in Texas;</li>
<li><strong>Baltimore Gas and Electric</strong>, serving 1.2 million customers in Maryland;</li>
<li><strong>CenterPoint Energy</strong>, serving 1.8 million households in Texas;</li>
<li><strong>Commonwealth Edison</strong>, serving 3.4 million households in Illinois;</li>
<li><strong>NSTAR</strong>, serving 1.1 million households in Massachusetts;</li>
<li><strong>PECO</strong>, serving 1.4 million households in Pennsylvania;</li>
<li><strong>Reliant</strong>, serving 500,000 households in Texas;</li>
<li><strong>Virginia Dominion Power</strong>, serving 2.4 million customers in Virginia and North Carolina.</li>
</ul>
<p><br/> Companies announcing planned involvement in Green Button:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/aclara-turns-on-green-button-for-pepco/" target="_blank"><strong>Aclara</strong></a></li>
<li><strong>Belkin</strong></li>
<li><strong>EcoDog</strong></li>
<li><strong>Efficiency 2.0</strong></li>
<li><strong>EnergySavvy</strong></li>
<li><strong>FirstFuel</strong></li>
<li><strong>Honest Buildings</strong></li>
<li><strong>Itron</strong></li>
<li><strong>Lucid</strong></li>
<li><strong>OPower</strong></li>
<li><strong>Oracle</strong></li>
<li><strong>Plotwatt</strong></li>
<li><strong>Schneider-Electric</strong></li>
<li><strong>Silver Spring Networks</strong></li>
<li><strong>Simple Energy</strong></li>
<li><strong>Sunrun</strong></li>
<li><strong>Tendril</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><br/> Other links:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/11/21/empowering-customers-green-button">http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/11/21/empowering-customers-green-button</a></p>
<p><a href="http://gigaom.com/cleantech/utilities-embrace-green-button-energy-data-project/">http://gigaom.com/cleantech/utilities-embrace-green-button-energy-data-project/</a></p>
<p> </p>Why free energy perpetual motion devices don't worktag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2011-11-25:6069565:BlogPost:695062011-11-25T22:49:21.000ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiser
<p>The following appeared on my blog Mapawatt and is in response to the "free energy plans" that have infiltrated Google and Facebook advertisements. I'm afraid a large number of people get suckered into buying these and are left with junk.<br></br> --------------</p>
<p>It still amazes me that with all our posts dedicated to trying to help homeowners save energy, our most popular posts are on free energy scams (mainly…</p>
<p>The following appeared on my blog Mapawatt and is in response to the "free energy plans" that have infiltrated Google and Facebook advertisements. I'm afraid a large number of people get suckered into buying these and are left with junk.<br/> --------------</p>
<p>It still amazes me that with all our posts dedicated to trying to help homeowners save energy, our most popular posts are on free energy scams (mainly <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2009/07/21/magniwork_perpetual_motion_scam/" target="_blank">magniwork</a> and <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2011/11/05/hojo-motor-is-a-scam/" target="_blank">hojo motor</a>). I've gone back and forth with the energy ignorant in the comment section of these posts, but I've never written a post dedicated to explaining why these products just won't work. This post is speaking to those who are confused about perpetual motion devices that claim to create more energy than they consume. If you notice in the title, I state they "don't" work, not that they "won't" work. They don't work according to the existing laws of physics. The future is unknowable.</p>
<p>Perpetual motion devices have been attempted for as long as man started making complicated machinery. The goal of many unfortunate inventors has been to create a machine that will produce useful work in a closed loop system, or in a system without any external forces. Donald Simanek maintains an excellent history at attempts to create perpetual motion devices in his <a href="http://www.lhup.edu/%7Edsimanek/museum/unwork.htm" target="_blank">Museum of Unworkable Devices</a>.</p>
<p>In scientific terms, perpetual motion devices are impossible under the <em>current</em> laws of thermodynamics. Being humans with tiny little brains, our understanding of the universe is limited, so there is always the possibility that the laws of physics will expand and/or change over time. But as the laws <strong>currently exist</strong>, the two that are most frequently cited regarding perpetual motion devices are the first and second law of thermodynamics. In summary (quotes attributed to <a href="http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thermodynamics" target="_blank">C.P. Snow</a>):</p>
<ol>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics" target="_blank">First law of thermodynamics</a> - Conservation of energy. <span>Energy can be transformed from one form to another, but it can't be created or destroyed. "You cannot win (that is, you cannot get something for nothing, because matter and energy are conserved)."<br/></span></li>
<li><span><span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics" target="_blank">Second law of thermodynamics</a> - Entropy.</span></span> Systems always flow to a state of disorder. "You cannot break even (you cannot return to the same energy state, because there is always an increase in disorder; entropy always increases).<span>"<br/></span></li>
</ol>
<br/> Wikipedia classifies the different categories of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion" target="_blank">perpetual motion</a> devices as follows:<p>"One classification of perpetual motion machines refers to the particular law of thermodynamics the machines purport to violate:</p>
<ul>
<li>A <strong>perpetual motion machine of the first kind</strong> produces <a title="Work (thermodynamics)" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_%28thermodynamics%29">work</a> without the input of <a title="Energy" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy">energy</a>. It thus violates the first law of thermodynamics: the <a title="Law of conservation of energy" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_conservation_of_energy">law of conservation of energy</a>.</li>
<li>A <strong>perpetual motion machine of the second kind</strong> is a machine which spontaneously converts thermal energy into mechanical work. When the thermal energy is equivalent to the work done, this does not violate the law of conservation of energy. However it does violate the more subtle <a title="Second law of thermodynamics" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics">second law of thermodynamics</a> (see also <a title="Entropy" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy">entropy</a>). The signature of a perpetual motion machine of the second kind is that there is only one heat reservoir involved, which is being spontaneously cooled without involving a transfer of heat to a cooler reservoir. This conversion of heat into useful work, without any side effect, is impossible, according to the second law of thermodynamics.</li>
</ul>
<br/> A more obscure category is a <strong>perpetual motion machine of the third kind</strong>, usually (but not always)defined as one that completely eliminates friction and other dissipative forces, to maintain motion forever (due to its mass inertia). <em>Third</em> in this case refers solely to the position in the above classification scheme, not the <a title="Third law of thermodynamics" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_law_of_thermodynamics">third law of thermodynamics</a>. Although it is impossible to make such a machine, as dissipation can never be 100% eliminated in a mechanical system, it is nevertheless possible to get very close to this ideal (see examples in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion#Low_friction">Low Friction</a> section). Such a machine would not serve as a source of energy but would have utility as a perpetual energy storage device."<p>In summary, here are reasons why perpetual motion energy generation devices don't work:</p>
<p><strong>Conservation of Energy</strong> - Say the law of conservation of energy wasn't a law. You create a perpetual motion device that somehow overcomes all of the external forces mentioned above and you have a device that can operate itself perpetually (similar to the perpetual motion machine of the second kind listed above). Now, your device can operate forever, but how can you extract any work from it? If you take energy out of your machine, you will slow it down! And no, magnets don't "create" energy, they just create a propulsion force. To make magnets do work you have to add energy (i.e. spin them).</p>
<p>I'm not sure I can spend too much time on this one point, because this is ultimately at the heart of perpetual motion energy generation machines. If someone claims they can get energy out of a system, that energy has to come from SOMEWHERE! It can come from the sun (nuclear), wind (which is created by the sun), gravity (one way trip), coal/natural gas/oil (dead organisms initially powered by sun), nuclear, humans (powered by food which is powered by sun), etc. ENERGY HAS TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE. There is no free lunch.</p>
<p><em>Now, there is this tiny little issue of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy" target="_blank">dark energy</a> (also mentioned at the end of this post), but it is outside the scope of this discussion because I don't know too many inventors claiming their perpetual motion device operates on dark energy.</em></p>
<p><strong>Friction and external forces</strong> - This is really an expansion of the law of conservation of energy. Friction occurs when molecules of one thing come in contact with molecules of another thing. Rub your hands together and feel heat generated. That heat is energy leaving your body. Anything operating on Earth will encounter external forces.</p>
<p>Thought exercise time! Think about driving your car down a flat highway. Bring your car up to speed. Go ahead, whatever speed you want, there is no speed limit here. Now take your foot off the accelerator. What happens? You car is going to slow down and eventually stop because of air resistance (or friction between the air outside and the body of your car), rolling resistance between your tires and the road (or friction between asphalt and rubber) because gravity (external force) is pulling your car towards the earth, and the internal friction between all the working parts of your car (pistons, wheel bearings, crank shaft, etc.).</p>
<p>Ok, we're done with the cute little thought exercise. Now imagine that car is some perpetual motion machine. Guess what, all those external forces are still there!</p>
<p><strong>Entropy</strong> - This is the hardest to explain but it is also the most obvious. Basically, everything in the universe wants to go to a state of disorder. Buildings don't build themselves, and when they're built, they fall down. Heat always flows from hot to cold. Everything dies. Everything falls apart. Maybe one day the universe will start collapsing in on itself, time will reverse itself, and this won't be the case. But in the known lifespan of the universe (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_universe" target="_blank">13.75 billion years</a>) entropy has always (<strong>100% of the time</strong>) increased. A perpetual motion machine would result in no net disorder, which has never happened in 13.75 billion years. Not a fan of history dictating future, that's fine, how are you going to get past conservation of energy?</p>
<p><a href="http://mkaku.org/home/?page_id=5" target="_blank">Michio Kaku</a> (who graduated first in his Harvard physics class, received his doctorate from Berkeley, and taught at Princeton) addresses perpetual motion machines in chapter 14 of his excellent book <a title="Amazon.com: Physics of the impossible" href="http://www.amazon.com/Physics-Impossible-Scientific-Exploration-Teleportation/dp/0385520697" target="_blank">Physics of the Impossible</a>. In his book, Kaku breaks down "impossible" into three classes (summarized below):</p>
<ul>
<li>Class 1 impossibility - impossible today but do not violate known laws of physics</li>
<li>Class 2 impossibility - technologies that sit at the edge of our understanding. If possible, they may be realized thousands or millions of years in the future</li>
<li>Class 3 impossibility - technologies that violate the known laws of physics. If possible, these technologies would represent a shift in our understanding of physics</li>
</ul>
<br/> Kaku labels perpetual motion a Class 3 impossibility (teleportation and telepathy are Class 1, time machines are a Class 2). He states in the closing of chapter 14 on perpetual motion:<blockquote>Because creating a true perpetual motion machine may require us to reevaluate the fundamental laws of physics on a cosmological scale, I would rank perpetual motion machines as a Class III impossibility; that is, either they are truly impossible, or we would need to fundamentally change our understanding of fundamental physics on a cosmological scale in order to make such a machine possible. Dark energy remains one of the greatest unfinished chapters in modern science</blockquote>
<br/> Do you understand why I'm referencing this? An expert in theoretical physics labels perpetual motion as 1 of only 2 class 3 impossibilities in all of theoretical physics (the other being precognition).<p>Finally, I must address a claim that I see all the time regarding free energy devices. Conspiracy theorists claim that the big bad energy companies are suppressing free energy devices because it will destroy their profits. This is complete and utter rubbish. Let me tell you how I would get around this issue if I had stumbled on the greatest discovery in all of history:</p>
<ol>
<li>Chronicle my discovery in exhausting detail. Paper, electronic, pictures, videos, etc. Create hard copies and store them with trusted love ones. Email electronic copies to email addresses I make up on multiple different hosts. Take out multiple safety deposit boxes in many different states/countries and store identical copies of my research in each one.</li>
<li>Create a company whose purpose is to build and sell my device or power from my device. Make sure to find a good attorney to ensure all legal work is in proper order. Getting a good attorney is critical.</li>
<li>Go to investors/universities/press and demonstrate my findings. Sell shares of my company if capital is needed. Venture capital guys are pretty good at making money on any kind of idea, there is no need to go to the energy companies.</li>
<li>Become the richest and most famous person in the world while alleviating many of the world's problems.</li>
</ol>
<br/> How could the big bad energy companies hurt my plan? They couldn't. Nobody can stop someone else who has a powerful idea. Sure, the person who created the idea could be murdered, but if step 1 is followed properly, the idea still lives on. Would you really fear death if you had the idea to change the lives of 7 billion people? Blaming large energy corporations is the cowards excuse for why his/her favorite perpetual motion device won't work. Of interesting note is Andrea Rossi and his <a href="http://mapawatt.com/2011/11/13/heat-your-home-with-cold-fusion/" target="_blank">cold fusion energy generator</a>. Rossi seems to be following the steps above, and is in the middle of step 3. We'll see if the device (which is not perpetual motion, but is cheap, clean energy) works or not. Hopefully he reaches step 4.<p>Hopefully you now understand why perpetual motions machines won't work according to the existing laws of thermodynamics. Could the future change and could dark energy provide unlimited power? Sure it can, but until then, machines will never operate perpetually, much less create free energy.</p>
<p>End of story.</p>
<p>Links:</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge/challenge-blog-mainmenu-97/158-the-perpetual-motion-parade.html">http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge/challenge-blog-mainmenu-97/158-the-perpetual-motion-parade.html</a></p>
<p><a href="http://peswiki.com/index.php/Main_Page">http://peswiki.com/index.php/Main_Page</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae280.cfm">http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae280.cfm</a></p>Why the incandescent deserves its deathtag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2011-05-25:6069565:BlogPost:401012011-05-25T14:07:04.000ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiser
<p><a href="http://api.ning.com:80/files/kqet2AoRh3cxik7tIfSlg*afqnFRnZ6frpFiJLD7xwSenhZhc6oT5ceWio*pcfxMUc8sL1KKzeN8nsfTElNIl7BHpqAbeZK9/incandescent_ban_death.jpg" target="_self"><img class="align-full" src="http://api.ning.com:80/files/kqet2AoRh3cxik7tIfSlg*afqnFRnZ6frpFiJLD7xwSenhZhc6oT5ceWio*pcfxMUc8sL1KKzeN8nsfTElNIl7BHpqAbeZK9/incandescent_ban_death.jpg" width="350"></img></a></p>
<p>First off, there is no law actually calling for the death of the incandescent. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 actually states…</p>
<p><a target="_self" href="http://api.ning.com:80/files/kqet2AoRh3cxik7tIfSlg*afqnFRnZ6frpFiJLD7xwSenhZhc6oT5ceWio*pcfxMUc8sL1KKzeN8nsfTElNIl7BHpqAbeZK9/incandescent_ban_death.jpg"><img class="align-full" src="http://api.ning.com:80/files/kqet2AoRh3cxik7tIfSlg*afqnFRnZ6frpFiJLD7xwSenhZhc6oT5ceWio*pcfxMUc8sL1KKzeN8nsfTElNIl7BHpqAbeZK9/incandescent_ban_death.jpg" width="350"/></a></p>
<p>First off, there is no law actually calling for the death of the incandescent. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 actually states <a title="Wikipedia.org: Energy Independence and Security Act: incandescent bulbs" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Independence_and_Security_Act_of_2007#Incandescent_lights" target="_blank">something along the lines of</a> :</p>
<blockquote><p>… requires all general-purpose light bulbs that produce 310–2600 <a title="Lumen (unit)" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumen_%28unit%29">lumens</a> of light be 30% more energy efficient (similar to current <a title="Halogen lamp" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halogen_lamp">halogen lamps</a>) than current incandescent bulbs by 2012 to 2014. The efficiency standards will start with 100-watt bulbs in January 2012 and end with 40-watt bulbs in January 2014.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So it doesn’t explicitly say you can’t use incandescents, it just lays out standards that light bulbs have to meet, and most indancescents aren’t going to cut it. The actual text regarding to the incandescent’s demise can be seen in Section 321 of the full bill, found <a title="Energy Independence and Security act of 2007" href="http://energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=IssueItems.Detail&amp;IssueItem_ID=f10ca3dd-fabd-4900-aa9d-c19de47df2da&amp;Month=12&amp;Year=2007" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p>But aside from the actual wording of the law, the fact is that the incandescent is going the way of the Dodo bird. There are many in this country who are outraged. They feel like the Federal government has no right to tell them what bulb they can and can’t use. And I can see their argument…to a point. Before we actually look at why the incandescent deserves to die, let’s look at why replacements for the incandescent – CFLs and LEDs – are finally making sense for homeowners.</p>
<p>In the near term, most people will be replacing incandescents with CFLs. <a href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2011/05/18/what-is-the-best-cfl-followup/q" target="_blank">There were a lot of problems with early batches of CFLs</a>, but the ones I have in my house have worked great. Make sure that you pick the right color temperature (the color of light the bulb puts out). For the <a title="Good CFLs" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/03/30/the-cfls-i-buy/" target="_blank">CFLs I buy</a>, I picked a color temperature close to incandescents, and it is a great match and brighter. There are no start-up delay issues that I’ve heard about with other CFLs. Basically, when it comes to bulb quality, you may have to do a little more research than you did with incandescents, but it will be worth it.</p>
<p>Which brings us to payback. I have a lighting cost calculator on our post <a title="Best Lighting Cost Calculator" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/10/03/best-lighting-cost-comparison-incandescent-cfl-led/" target="_blank">Best Lighting Cost Calculator</a> which showed that over a 5 year time frame CFLs and LEDs far outperformed incandescents on a cost basis. From a life-cycle cost perspective, CFLs outperform incandescents in just a few months. LEDs still may take a few years but the cost of LEDs seems to be coming down every 6 months!<span id="more-5967"></span></p>
<p>Finally you have the concern that some people have about mercury in CFLs. I addressed this in our post <a title="Mapawatt Blog: Mercury in CFLs" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2011/04/04/lets-put-mercury-and-cfls-in-perspective/" target="_blank">Let’s put Mercury in CFLs in Perspective</a>. If you read this post and you’re still worried about CFLs, lucky for you that LEDs are finally getting affordable!</p>
<p>Now we come to the reasons I support the death of the incandescent!</p>
<p>In most cases, I am for limited government intervention. I probably subscribe closest to the Libertarian political ideology. I usually champion the free markets and the power they have to bring about honest human decisions. But there is one area that free markets fail miserably in, and that is for accounting for externalities. This is where things get interesting when it comes to the banning of the incandescent.</p>
<p>People like incandescents because they like the color they put out, but mostly because they have a cheap initial cost. Humans are notoriously awful at factoring in long term operational costs, and are more concerned with the initial price we pay. Basically, humans aren’t wired to make the most sustainable (from an environmental and economical) decision. People don’t want the government telling them what they can and can not buy for their hard earned dollar. But while incandescents are cheap to buy, they are much more expensive to operate over the long term, and that is because they are so energy inefficient. Most of the electricity used in an incandscent is lost to heat, about 90%. And chances are that the majority of that <a title="Mapawatt Blog: Where does U.S. electricity come from?" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2010/11/29/where-does-u-s-electricity-come-from/">electricity was generated by fossil fuel power</a>. As we all know, <a title="Mapawatt Blog: True cost of coal" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2011/02/21/the-true-cost-of-coal/" target="_blank">fossil fuel power production pollutes the environment</a> much more other forms of power production.</p>
<p><strong>So by effectively banning the incandescent bulb the government is limiting the harmful effects of fossil fuel power production pollution that society encounters.</strong></p>
<p>To those who say that the government has no right to tell them what bulb they can buy I ask, “What right do you have to pollute my air?” It’s the same reason I am against smoking cigarettes in public places. I’m fine with the fact that cigarette smokers want to shorten their life for a little nicotine buzz, but I’m not fine with the fact that I have to suffer for their enjoyment.</p>
<p>I believe it is the government’s job to protect the air we breathe, because we all know the free-market has no chance at this. Is the incandescent the best target? Who knows….but it sure is a start.</p>
<p>More importantly, what do YOU think?</p>Beware of Power Factor Correction products!tag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2011-04-12:6069565:BlogPost:335092011-04-12T20:21:12.000ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiser
<p>This post was originally posted <a href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/03/31/power-factor/" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Product developers know that as energy costs rise, consumer's budgets get tightened, and people start to care more about their environment (the trifecta of sustainable drivers), those consumers are going to want products that help them save energy. But do all these products live up to their…</p>
<p>This post was originally posted <a target="_blank" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/03/31/power-factor/">here</a>.</p>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Product developers know that as energy costs rise, consumer's budgets get tightened, and people start to care more about their environment (the trifecta of sustainable drivers), those consumers are going to want products that help them save energy. But do all these products live up to their claims?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">One of these products is a power factor correction device and can be seen <a target="_blank" href="https://www.energyindependencestartshere.com/products/Medium-Residential-KVAR-Energy-Controller-PU-1200/1/" title="Power Factor improving device">here</a>. This product claims:</p>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;"><p style="text-align: justify;">Residential customers throughout North America could see a realized savings of 8% - 10% typically and as much as 25% on their electrical usage (and thus power bills).</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: justify;">However, I'm not buying it. There are two great resources on-line that address this same issue. One is from the <a href="http://www.nist.gov/pml/quantum/power_121509.cfm" title="NSIT.gov: Power Factor Correction">National Institute of Standards</a> and the other is a blogger I've been reading for 4 years and has a great section on electricity, <a target="_blank" href="http://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/powerfactor.html" title="Michael Bluejay: Comments on Power Factor">Michael Bluejay</a>. Both of these resources say power factor correction really wont help on your residential bill. It can make a difference for certain industrial users who may be billed by the Utility for peak demand, but this is another story (and it is addressed in the Bluejay article).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">To go a little deeper, the formula for Power Factor (PF) is below:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;">PF = Real Power (Watts) ÷ Apparent Power (VA)</p>
<p style="text-align: center;">- or -</p>
<p style="text-align: center;">Watts = PF*Amps*Voltage = PF * Apparent Power</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The power factor correction devices are said to improve the second half of the above equation, the Apparent Power. However <strong>you don't pay your utility for Apparent Power</strong>. You pay them for Real Power (Watts). Apparent Power is defined as the total power in an AC circuit, both dissipated AND returned! (scroll to the bottom of this link to view the <a target="_blank" href="http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_11/2.html" title="Power Triangle">power triangle and description of Apparent, Real and Reactive power</a>). This means that if you currently have a poor power factor, your Apparent Power is higher, but all this means is that you are returning more unused electrons to the utility! But since they only charge you for used electrons (dissipated electrons = Real Power = Watts) you don't give a hoot about your Apparent Power!</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Let's take an example of 2 completely identical motors sitting side by side. Both of these motors have the exact same efficiency and operate at 1.2 kW. The first motor doesn't have a power correcting device. The second motors does have PF correcting device.</p>
<br/>
<ul>
<li>Motor 1: 1.2 kW motor, connected to a 120 V circuit, PF = .7</li>
<li>Motor 2: 1.2 kW motor, connected to a 120 V circuit, PF = .999 (this has the Power Factor correction device, thus the excellent PF!)</li>
</ul>
Using the equation above we can show the amps (current) that will be dissipated in motor 1:<br/>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>1.2 kW</strong> = .7 *120V * A → A= 14.29</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">And we can do the same thing for motor 2:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>1.2 kW</strong> = .999*120V*A → A=10.01</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">But this doesn't mean you'll pay less to the utility! All this shows as that your power factor increases (gets better) your amperage decreases, but the Real Power (Watts = what the utility charges you) stays the same! Therefore no matter your power factor, in residential settings the utility is still going to show that you took the same amount of Real Power off of the power lines, so that is what you pay.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">I would like to see more info from the manufacturers of these devices on how improving PF helps save you Watts! Basically, your utility doesn't really care what your Power Factor is, so I want to see some evidence on how this device impacts your energy bill.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">One more thing! On the product's website there are many customer testimonials. NEVER believe customer testimonials. Especially on things like energy saving devices or products that claim they can improve your gas mileage. The reason people believe these testimonials is because they can't see electricity flowing through their home, so they just take the product's statements at face value. Even if the "customer" really said the things about the product, how do you know they aren't mentally insane and or compulsive liars?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Also, if your energy bill goes down the month after you install this, how do you know its not just because you didnt have your AC or lights on as much? You dont! Only believe data and analysis from trusted web sources (Mapawatt, Rocky Mountain Institute, Energy Star, Michael Bluejay, Home Energy Pros, etc.).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">I'm not the only site questioning the validity of Power Factor correction devices. Open4Energy has a great review of <a target="_blank" href="http://open4energy.com/forum/home/scam/power_factor_correction" title="Open4Energy: Power factor correction Scam">Power Factor correction devices</a> and another post on <a target="_blank" href="http://open4energy.com/forum/home/scam/energy_saving_scams" title="Open4Energy: Energy Saving Scams">Energy Saving Scams</a>. I should note that it is in their "scam" section! An Electrical Engineer friend of mine just send me the most detailed technical and economic analysis I've seen on the topic of residential power factor correction devices. Check it out after you read the blog below if you are really interested: <a title="NLCPR: Power factor correction" href="http://www.nlcpr.com/Deceptions1.php" target="_blank"> NLCPR: Power Factor correction</a>. Here's another review I've done on a power factor correction product <a target="_blank" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2011/01/07/the-zap-box-does-it-work/">The Zap Box</a>.</p>Putting Mercury in CFLs in Perspectivetag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2011-04-05:6069565:BlogPost:318642011-04-05T01:55:56.000ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiser
This is an updated version of the post that originally appeared <a href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2011/04/04/lets-put-mercury-and-cfls-in-perspective/" target="_blank">here</a>.<br></br><br></br>
I'm a fan of CFLs, but I can understand how the small amount of mercury in them can worry some. If you're worried about the tiny bit of mercury in CFLs, I can't tell you one way or another how to decide for your home, all I can do is give you the facts that are available, and let you make your own decision.…
This is an updated version of the post that originally appeared <a href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2011/04/04/lets-put-mercury-and-cfls-in-perspective/" target="_blank">here</a>.<br/><br/>
I'm a fan of CFLs, but I can understand how the small amount of mercury in them can worry some. If you're worried about the tiny bit of mercury in CFLs, I can't tell you one way or another how to decide for your home, all I can do is give you the facts that are available, and let you make your own decision. What I can do though is call out those who (whether they know it or not) try to mislead others with fears about mercury.<br/>
<br/>
There are three important things to keep in perspective when looking at mercury and CFLs. I covered the first 2 in our post written over two years ago titled <a title="Mapawatt Blog: Mercury and CFL recycling" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/02/23/mercury-and-cfl-recycling/" target="_blank">Mercury and CFL recyling</a>:<br/>
<br/>
1: The amount of mercury in CFL bulbs is a very small amount. From our earlier post:<br/>
<blockquote>The biggest drawback to these light bulbs is the small amount of mercury contained in them. As stated in this <a title="CFL Mercury Fact Sheet" href="http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf" target="_blank">handy factsheet</a> created by Energy Star, the average CFL contains 4 milligrams of mercury. I know you’re scratching your head trying to visualize 4 mg. Remember the old thermometers you had to stick under your tongue when the “hand to the forehead” wasn’t enough. That contained 500 mg (125 CFLs) of Mercury! That’s not saying the Mercury in CFL’s doesn’t matter, it just means that we have to be reasonable with objections.</blockquote>
2: Many places now recycle CFLs for you! Use this handy <a title="Earth911: Recycle CFls" href="http://search.earth911.com/?what=CFL" target="_blank">recycle station finder from Earth 911 to find a place to recycle your CFLs</a>.<br/>
<br/>
I hit on the number 3 thing to keep in perspective recently when we received a comment on our <a title="Mapawatt Blog: Best Lighting Cost Comparison" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/10/03/best-lighting-cost-comparison-incandescent-cfl-led/" target="_blank">Best Lighting Cost Comparison</a> post from Jackson, who is ill-informed on mercury emissions and the environment, and I didn't appreciate his smug attitude. His comment:<br/>
<br/>
"Are we all so caught up in feeling good about being “Green” that we completely negate the future feelings of what it will be like to pay more for drinking water than we do for gasoline? That’s right everyone, Mercury is a poison. Perhaps Edison was right in the first place? CFL’s are what happen when you allow government to run your lives. Good luck with all your “Feelings” of saving the planet. Such small thinkers, tisk tisk. I am burning all incan’s and have enough stashed away to last me a lifetime. One thing for certain I will be greener than all of you CFL lovers."<br/>
<br/>
And here was my reply:<br/>
<br/>
"Hey Jackson….do tell me what part of the country you live in? Unless it’s the Northwest, I’m guessing the majority of your electricity comes from coal. From this link from <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.popularmechanics.com/home/reviews/news/4217864">Popular Mechanics comparing Mercury emitted from incandescent vs. CFLs</a>:<br/>
<blockquote>About 50 percent of the electricity produced in the U.S. is generated by coal-fired power plants. When coal burns to produce electricity, mercury naturally contained in the coal releases into the air. In 2006, coal-fired power plants produced 1,971 billion kilowatt hours (kwh) of electricity, emitting 50.7 tons of mercury into the air—the equivalent amount of mercury contained in more than 9 billion CFLs (the bulbs emit zero mercury when in use or being handled). <br/>
Approximately 0.0234 mg of mercury—plus carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide—releases into the air per 1 kwh of electricity that a coal-fired power plant generates. Over the 7500-hour average range of one CFL, then, a plant will emit 13.16 mg of mercury to sustain a 75-watt incandescent bulb but only 3.51 mg of mercury to sustain a 20-watt CFL (the lightning equivalent of a 75-watt traditional bulb). Even if the mercury contained in a CFL was directly released into the atmosphere, an incandescent would still contribute 4.65 more milligrams of mercury into the environment over its lifetime.</blockquote>
<p>3: Coal burned to produce electricity to power incandescents emits more mercury than CFLs would!<br/>
<br/>
Of course this mercury is spread out in our environment, and not right in your home, but on a national policy perspective, I would encourage everyone to use CFLs so our collective environment (and thus the land we live on and the food we eat) is less contaminated. Now, if I had a small child at home, I would still use CFLs, I would just be ever vigilant to ensure the CFLs didn't break in my home. If one did break, I would <a title="GE: What to do if a CFL breaks" href="http://www.gelighting.com/na/home_lighting/ask_us/faq_compact.htm#breaks" target="_blank">follow these steps to clean up a broken CFL properly</a>.<br/>
<br/>
I just wonder if all of these people concerned with mercury in CFLs refused to put a thermometer in their mouth when they were little? Remember, an old mercury thermometer had 125 times more mercury than a CFL!!! And you put it in your mouth!!! Where was all the outrage then?<br/>
<br/>
Make your own choices, but make sure you have the facts and you put everything in perspective!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So to all the Energy Pros, what do you recommend when a friend or customer asks about CFLs and why?</p>Residential Solar PV vs Residential Wind Turbinetag:homeenergypros.lbl.gov,2011-03-29:6069565:BlogPost:305442011-03-29T17:00:00.000ZChris Kaiserhttp://homeenergypros.lbl.gov/profile/ChrisKaiser
<p><a href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/residential_wind_vs_solar.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-5538" height="400" src="http://blog.mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/residential_wind_vs_solar.jpg" title="residential_wind_vs_solar" width="550"></img></a> <br></br> This post originally appeared on Mapawatt Blog and is a great <a href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2011/03/27/residential-clean-energy-solar-vs-wind/" target="_blank">comparison of residential solar vs. wind</a>. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>If you're a homeowner interested in creating your own clean energy, chances are you are considering installing a solar pv array or a wind turbine. Which is…</p>
<p><a href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/residential_wind_vs_solar.jpg"><img height="400" width="550" src="http://blog.mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/residential_wind_vs_solar.jpg" title="residential_wind_vs_solar" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-5538"/></a><br/> This post originally appeared on Mapawatt Blog and is a great <a target="_blank" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2011/03/27/residential-clean-energy-solar-vs-wind/">comparison of residential solar vs. wind</a>.
</p>
<p> </p>
<p>If you're a homeowner interested in creating your own clean energy, chances are you are considering installing a solar pv array or a wind turbine. Which is the better option? Luckily Spokesman-Review did a story on <a target="_blank" href="http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/jan/19/solar-takes-wind-in-test/">Inland Power and Light in Spokane, WA and their efforts to see which is better for residential power generation - solar panels or wind turbines</a>. They installed a solar array and a wind turbine that were comparable in cost, and then sat back to see which one came out ahead.</p>
<blockquote>The solar panels have produced about five times as much electricity as the wind turbine over the past 14 months. The sun’s ability to generate more electricity than the wind – even during short winter days – has surprised the utility’s engineers. The utility bought a 35-foot wind turbine and a bank of solar panels. The systems are representative of technology scaled to individual homeowner use, Damiano said. Each cost from $22,000 to $24,000 to install.</blockquote>
The results were surprising to them because conventional thinking is that the Northwest would have more wind than it does sun:<br/>
<blockquote>But wind is more erratic than people realize, he said. The wind dies down, for instance, during hot weather and cold spells. Inland Power’s turbine is similar to the larger ones installed in the Columbia River Gorge. It needs a stiff breeze of around 12 miles per hour to start producing electricity. Solar panels, on the other hand, generate a certain amount of electricity even on cloudy days.</blockquote>
This is a great example of solar vs. wind, but aside from understanding some of the basics about solar and wind power, it is really only applicable if you live in or around Spokane, WA. At Mapawatt, we like to do the analysis ourselves and help show you how to your own analysis....so here we go! (Update - 3/28/11 - I contact Richard Damiano, Inland's chief engineer, after I wrote the post and he was gracious enough to provide me with more information on their installation. If you don't want to see my analysis, skip down to the bottom to see the actual data!)<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
We covered how to calculate solar power production in your area on our post "<a target="_blank" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/10/20/solar-power-payback/" title="Mapawatt Blog: Solar Power Payback">Solar Power Payback</a>". For some reason, the utility did not share the actual sizes of the solar array or wind turbine, so we can only estimate those sizes given the price they paid. Based on solar installer friends I have in Atlanta, I know solar installation prices (including panels, mounting equipment, inverters, labor, etc.) can be had for around $5/watt (since their system has been installed for awhile, and labor is more expensive on the west coast, I'll use $6/watt) . Since their prices ranged from 22k to 24k, I'll take the high-range at $24,000. Divide that by $6 and we can estimate that their solar installation was 4 kW. Entering this value into the <a target="_blank" href="http://bpsolar.cleanpowerestimator.com/default.aspx" title="BP Clean Power Estimator">BP Clean Power Estimator</a>, I get the yearly solar power energy produced for Spokane, WA at 4,856 kWh.<br/>
<br/>
Now, the news article on the Inland Power pilot project states:<br/>
<blockquote>In the Inland Power pilot project, the solar panels produced about 15 percent of a typical household’s electric needs over the course of a year. The wind turbine produced less than 3 percent.</blockquote>
But this is a very poor way at analyzing clean energy because what is a "typical household's electric needs"? One home that is 5,000 sq. feet and has a family of six who don't really try to save energy is going to use way more energy than a 2,000 sq. feet and family of three who tries to save energy. <strong>This isn't just a few percent, but could be double or even quadruple</strong>. The only fair way to present this information is to give the yearly kWh produced, and recommend that people look at their utility bills from last year and see what percentage this would make up. Or give the range that this could make up for different households, i.e. "This solar panel array would produce 50% in a smaller home that already conserves energy, but only 15% in a large home that doesn't do a good job conserving energy". I firmly believe that when reporters try and over simplify energy data it only serves to confuse the reader more, or at worst give them false information that they then base their thought process off of.<br/>
<br/>
Update - 3/28/11 - Mr. Damiano sent me an excellent flyer describing how much the solar panel system would produce as a percentage of a home's energy consumption. He also explained that the 15% number was based on an average annual electricity consumption of 18,000 kWh. This may be higher than what you would expect but most of their customers use electric furnaces to heat with. Here is the <a href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Inland-Power-Residential-Solar-Flyer.pdf">Inland Power Residential Solar Flyer</a>.<br/>
<br/>
Trying to estimate how much clean energy you can produce at your home is much easier with solar power than wind power. This is because with solar, we know approximately how much <a target="_blank" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insolation" title="Wikipedia: Solar Insolation">solar insolation</a> you will receive in a year based on your latitude and longitude. This obviously varies due to cloud cover, but it can be reasonably estimated based on past history. The only real variable for homeowners is shading by trees, buildings or other obstructions, but those can also be accounted for.<br/>
<br/>
Wind power is not so easy. I did tell homeowners how to find wind speed data for their homes in our post "<a target="_blank" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2010/03/24/wind-speed-data-for-residential-wind-turbines/" title="Mapawatt Blog: Wind Speed Data for Residential Wind Turbins">Wind Speed data for Residential Wind Turbine</a>s". But I also pointed out the flaws in this method:<br/>
<br/>
"So this data is helpful, but unfortunately it’s not perfect. Unlike the sun which shines straight down and is easy to predict (“Is there a tree in the way?”) wind blows from the side and is affected by the landscape, trees, buildings, other houses, etc. The only real way to predict how a wind turbine will perform at your house is to <a target="_self" href="../2009/07/06/make-sure-you-have-wind-speed/" title="Mapawatt Blog: Anemometer">buy an anemometer</a>. Because wind can be so fickle, you can’t just rely on a computer program to predict if a wind turbine is going to be a good investment. You should really do the measurement yourself, or have a reputable dealer help you do it.<br/>
<br/>
Another thing to remember with wind-speed is that the “average wind speed” can be misleading when it comes to determining how much power a wind turbine will produce. As I said in our post on the <a target="_blank" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/07/06/make-sure-you-have-wind-speed/" title="Mapawatt Blog: Anemometer">Anemometer</a>, wind speed is so important because it is cubed in the equation above (P = .5 • ρ • A • V³; where P = power and V= wind speed). If you double your wind speed you don’t double your power output, you increase it by a cubic factor! For instance, increasing wind speed from 4 mph to 8 mph is not double the power output, but increases it 8 times (8³/4³=512/64=8)!"<br/>
<br/>
Using data from a weather station will put you in the ballpark for determining if wind may work, but it wont get you all the way there. For instance, if the wind speed is low at the weather station near you, the wind speed will probably be low near you, but a high wind speed at a weather station may not mean a high wind speed at your home. The only way to accurately gauge how much power a wind turbine will produce at your home is to <a target="_blank" href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/07/06/make-sure-you-have-wind-speed/" title="Mapawatt Blog: Use an anemometer">use an anemometer and a data recorder</a> over a several month study.<br/>
<br/>
But if we were to try to predict the yearly energy output from the wind turbine, we could follow my instructions to find the average wind speed for Spokane. Doing that (see Wind Speed data link above) we get the following result:<br/>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/spokane_wa_wind_history.jpg"><img height="297" width="300" src="http://blog.mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/spokane_wa_wind_history-300x297.jpg" title="spokane_wa_wind_history" class="size-medium wp-image-5535 aligncenter"/></a></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">At the bottom you can see that the average wind speed in Spokane over the course of a year was 8 mph. One of the more popular wind turbines for residential use out there is the <a href="http://www.skystreamenergy.com/how-it-works/" title="Southwest Wind Power: Skystream 3.7">Skystream 3.7 sold by Southwest Wind Power</a>. This turbine is rated at 2.4 kW. Even though <a target="_blank" href="http://www.minnesotasmallwind.com/Skystream.html">this site</a> says the Skystream wind turbine costs $14,000 to $18,000 to have it installed, let's just assume this is the unit Inland installed for comparison's sake. Using the graph below on the Skystream wind turbine's power output against wind speed, you can see that the Skystream produces 100 kWh per month wind the wind speed is 8 mph.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/skystream_wind_turbine_energy_output_graph.jpg"><img height="390" width="480" src="http://blog.mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/skystream_wind_turbine_energy_output_graph.jpg" title="skystream_wind_turbine_energy_output_graph" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-5536"/></a>Using this information, one would deduce that this wind turbine would produce 1,200 ( 100 kWh per month * 12 months) kWh per year. This is only a quarter of what we calculated the solar panels would produce (4,856 kWh) and this is very close to the real world results that Inland is seeing where the solar panels are producing 5 times more power than the wind turbine! Of course I made many assumptions in my analysis, but I'm in the ball park and hopefully you can see how to do some of this analysis on your own.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">As you can see, it is important to do your own due diligence when deciding between solar panels or wind turbines and the need to speak to many experts. Don't believe the turbine dealer who says "The wind always blows 'round here so you'll produce a ton of power!" Now you can do the analysis yourself!</p>
Keep in mind, that this study is only for residential installations. For utility scale installations, the prices change drastically as do the operating characteristics, mostly for wind due to the height of the turbine.<br/>
<br/>
The story on Inland ends with a note that the up front costs of clean energy installations are out of reach for many, but I like the conclusion:<br/>
<blockquote>From a cost-benefit standpoint, erecting a wind turbine or putting in solar panels is still a reach for most homeowners, Damiano said. Those who take the plunge are making a lifestyle choice to reduce their carbon footprint, he said. Recovering the installation costs for turbines or solar panels can take years, even with the 30 percent tax subsidy available to homeowners. “It will take you a chunk of time,” Finney acknowledged. But she encourages people to think about the long-term benefits.<br/>
<br/>
“Some people spend $25,000 on a new car,” she said. “We decided this is how we wanted to live and how we wanted to spend our money.”</blockquote>
------------------------------------<br/>
<br/>
Here are the project specs from Richard Damiano, Chief Engineer at Inland:<br/>
<br/>
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>Solar System:</strong></span><br/>
<ul>
<li>2.24 kW, fixed array, no adjustment for season or ability to track the sun</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Each panel has an inverter</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Installed in the fall of 2009 at a cost of about $10/W (total installed cost)</li>
</ul>
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>Wind System:</strong></span><br/>
<ul>
<li>2.4 kW turbine (<a target="_blank" href="http://www.provenenergy.co.uk/our-products/" title="Proven Wind Turbine">Proven Wind</a>) - (<em>Mapawatt Note: I was close with my guess of the Skystream in that they are both rated at right around 2.4 kW!</em>)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Installed in the fall of 2009 but was about 2 years old when installed</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>A member of Inland Power’s had the wind turbine installed, the unit was chosen based on wind maps showing 12 mph average at the location of their home, this did not prove to be true.</li>
</ul>
Richard went on to explain why the solar panels are outperforming wind:<br/>
<blockquote>One thing that most people do not take into account is the power factor of the system. Our solar panels are rated in the mid-90% range for Power Factor, this has proven out with actual peak production of slightly over 2.0 kW, exactly what I would expect given the power factor and efficiency of the panels and inverters. The wind turbine is rated in the lower 80% range for power factor. When you take this power factor and combine it with the efficiency of the inverters we see an actual peak production from the wind turbine of only slightly more than 1.0 kW at winds of 40 mph. So even though the wind turbine is nominally larger than the solar system, the efficiency of the system is much lower resulting in about half of the peak production capability of the solar. Combined with the erratic nature of wind it is easy to see why solar is outperforming wind in our area.</blockquote>